It’s put up or shut up time I think; either show some real examples (in video from the show, or in the transcripts) that show entrapment, or admit it isn’t happening. You can’t keep saying they “beg for it” and not show it. The video you posted already does nothing to bolster your case.
So let me get this straight…
You feel too much for the hypothetical, made up victim. The one that does not exist. Because the hypothetical victim’s made up story touched you so much, you cannot possibly have an opinion about an actual, real life manipulative predator, who was really, actually trolling message boards looking for sex with a girl he was told was 14 years old.
That sum it up?
Tempt me into stealing something, and you might have a point (but probably not). But, how much do I deserve for giving in to the temptation? I would answer: Every damn thing I get. Period. Do the crime, do the time. You deserve it.
Same with child molestation. But I can be tempted to steal. Because I want stuff. On the other hand, it doesn’t matter how much 13 year old pussy you dangle before me. No interest, no temptation, and you can’t induce me to commit the crime.
The perversion comes first. You can’t tempt those who are not interested in the first place.
Bears repeating.
I know someone in almost that exact situation, though she is a bit older (and no longer has legal protection of a minor). It was childhood abuse that formed the twisted idea of a relationship is in her mind, where the female is nothing but a way to satisfy the man and a object of his control. This lead to repeated abuse and a much diminished view of herself.
So it is a personal issue that is very hard hitting.
But I do know that what happened to her was not the sexual abuse and enslavement by the present predator (like in the cite), but the abuse by her parents in the past.
So I feel that most, but not all, the anger and hatred we have against the pedophile may be misplaces anger about the breakdown of the family caused by society. As it is society that influenced her family to abuse her to leave her open to later abuse, she was already raped way before she met her first sexual encounter. I don’t like the idea of punishing someone for the crimes of another (though that is what the whole Jesus thing is about)
To punish the pedophile has little chance of helping this girl almost zero chance of helping any other potential victim as they will seek it out from another. Could it help the pedophile, perhaps, I don’t know.
**But it’s not a crime to be perverted. A person can’t help if they are perverted and really like young teens. **
You can hate the person all you want but you can’t argue that they should be in prison because their sexuality may be messed up. How about give them a chance and some dignity? We all have issues.
I am not attracted to people underage and consider it an anomaly and perversion, a pathological condition, like diabetes or something. The hormones and signalling systems are really off.
You just basically agreed with the argument about laying cash around and then had that as a counter-argument as to why it’s different… well that is 100% definitely NOT why it is different. So if that’s the only reason you consider it different then you agree.
Leaving cash around for people desperate for cash and pouncing on people that try to take it because it’s illegal would not be tolerated and neither should this.
Well how about the fact that he just quantatively and clearly stated that he wasn’t going to have sex with her which prompted Hanson to jump in before their story got ruined even more?
They didn’t always ask to have sex. In fact, I think that it could potentially be a good and legitimate idea for a show if the man was clearly pestering the underage girl for sex. However they would find it very hard to come up with people for that, which is why they have to “work their way in”.
If you just listened to the girl on the phone, and they go on webcam also. It would take me a long time to try to find examples of this, but she talks in a really seductive voice in order to bring them in.
Now, TCAP’s story is that girls under 16 are unable to be seductive and charming right? Well this girl is seductive and charming and very manipulative at pressing the right buttons.
I think it’s safe to say that practically no underage girl would ever be like this in real life. Maybe TCAP have some potential predators in some fantasy world, but they don’t have the actual, really bad guys.
By TCAP’s own commentary, these people have “issues” and problems. Well suppose a man had anger management problem and sometimes went so far as to be violent with them. He had been in a bit of trouble before, but was now doing really well.
However some undercover agent started to really test him and prod him and push him, they were teasing him and trying to rile him up in whatever way they could. They did things that would not happen in real life in 99.99999% of cases. Finally, he just exploded and assaulted them. Who is at fault there?
Yes, paternal instincts, that’s what I probably should have said. In particular when the young teenager seems so interested in them.
You’re right, but the sad fact is that’s what they do do. They are really desperate for men to show up. It says they stopped programming because not many were showing up anymore and their cases were getting weaker.
I would say these are nasty people… but they are really conflicted money-wise. It’s the legal system that should be preventing this sort of nonsense from occurring.
Watch a couple of episodes. You can pretty much find the examples as fast as I can.
I wasn’t implying you were in the discussion earlier. The reason I used “dirty” is because most people believe that it is “dirty” in this specific instance where it involves an underage girl.
That’s not really lucky to be honest, you’d have to be extremely unlucky for that to ever happen.
Well, if this is the case, you’d never have begged an older man to come to your house, right? Or have been the first one to bring up the topic of sex.
And you know something? This sort of situation brings about this argument of “sympathizing with child predators” and is part of what stops the law from dealing with it better and stepping in on perverted-justice and TCAP. They feel like they don’t want to get associated with such matters or appear to be soft on crime in any way.
This site shows many of the antics perverted-justice comes up with:
One of the perverted-justice members was even put in jail recently for two years for sending out a computer virus. They are totally out of hand, and TCAP was intimitely connected with them, including paying them a lot.
They are not in prison because they are perverted. They are in prison becasue they attempted to have sex with a child. Them driving to the house is an overt act. If they show up at the house and claim they weren’t intending to screw the child, they are lying.
You don’t seem to get that they went to the chat rooms to find a child to fuck. That’s why they were there.
Have a look at this if you want to see what an ass this guy Xavier Von Erck (perverted justice founder) is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjwtmw_sAk0
Notice how he tries to attack the guy based on his age and tells him that he’s not national and spends a while denigrating him for that… ie… showing how much he values the fact that he’s national. He claims he spat in his face… the man is a liar and a jerk.
Look up google for this Xavier Von Erck and see how almost everyone hates him. This is the group that TCAP were in bed with and paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to.
This is just nonsense. At WORST, they were looking for someone to have sex with and they didn’t mind if it was a girl 13-17.
There is zero reason to think that they were specifically looking for a girl 13-17.
So we should not try to remove from society those that cruise chatrooms to find vulnerable victims to screw, because there are others out there who will simply victimize them anyway.
Is that the gist of it? I guess we just throw our hands up in the air and say "Oh well, it’s all societies fault anyway. Guess we should not bother doing anything.
They *should *mind the age of the girl. Adults should seek the attention of age appropriate persons. Period. Adults should avoid inappropriate relationships with underage strangers. Period.
Adults who disregard laws and refuse to consider the mental, emotional, and physical age of a potential partner risk legal repercussions and public humiliation.
This is delusional thinking. As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, 14 year old girls do not tempt grown men who are wired properly. It does not matter if they are “normal looking”. They are not normal.
Normal grown men do not go to chat rooms with children in them, and steer the conversation around to blowjobs when they have been told that their chat buddy is 14 years old.
Did you even read those transcripts?
ETA: The fact that you cannot seem to grasp that this is not normal behavior gives me pause…
I already addressed all of the points raised above… (eg. not being wired properly is unfortunate but NOT a crime and they may well have it under control for all realistic scenarios).
I NEVER SAID IT WAS NORMAL BEHAVIOUR. I JUST EXPLAINED IT IN MY LONG POST ABOVE IN SOME DETAIL. IT’S ABERRANT BEHAVIOUR. HOWEVER IT’S NOT CRIMINAL TO HAVE SUCH ISSUES.
I could wish someone died tomorrow, that doesn’t make me a criminal.
When I find myself repeating myself I take that as my cue to be done with a discussion.
Right? I mean, they didn’t pull a pistol and kill Chris Hansen, which if they did at least should be a mitigating circumstance to his subsequent conviction, if not something a reasonable person would do to merit a pardon from the Governor, so why does a dejected guy with slumped shoulders walking out the door with his hands up need a full felony stop by the SWAT team?
Answer: TV ratings.
I think that those perps might have a good tort for battery against the cops, the producers, the network, Chris Hansen, etc. I’m sure it has been tried… 
And as has been repeated over and over again:
They did not just have thoughts. They ACTED on their aberrant behavior, and WENT TO THE HOUSE of a girl they thought was 14 years old TO HAVE SEX WITH HER.
THIS IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
Let’s say I’m so angry at my neighbor that I want him dead. I talk to a guy I know and tell him I’ll pay him $50,000 to go to my neighbor’s house and kill him. If I’m reading ModernPrimate correctly, the police shouldn’t arrest my hired killer en route to the neighbor’s house because maybe he just wants to talk to my neighbor out of concern for his well being.
I know they acted on it, and that is a criminal offence prima facie.
However somewhere along in the discussion, a few posters stated that any thoughts at all showed that they are “perverted”, and suggested that this meant they should be behind bars. Thus doing away with issues about how they kept calling them and called their phones three times or more literally asking why they are not coming over. Look at about 3:30 on this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=ET43wwyqteM for evidence of them calling three times and really asking to come over (some of this begging over the phone is actually aired itself).
So they WERE stating that the temptation showed that the people are sick and was enough to prove that they are sick individuals and so everything was fine and dandy lock them up.
I was just stating that having such thoughts may be disgusting to some, but it is NOT criminal.
I must be retarded because for the life of me I can’t see even a crazy way in which this analogy makes the least bit of sense. The only possible similarity is that someone is going to someone else’s house and it’s possible they will commit an offence, bringing a third person in makes no sense.
ModernPrimate, two people are chatting. An impulsive, hormone-driven unsupervised 8th grader and a horny 33 year old father of two with a college education and good job. The topic of sex comes up. Which of the two should be expected to change the subject or end the conversation?
Both situations involve two people agreeing to do something that is against the law. You said maybe the guys who agreed to have sex with a young teen were just concerned and didn’t plan to go through with it - maybe my hitman is just concerned about my neighbor and won’t go through with the murder. Should the police leave the hitman alone so they don’t arrest a man who wasn’t going to do anything wrong, or should they act on the guy’s stated intent to break the law and his actions to follow through?
Did I say that? No I think I said, though some may find it idealistic, I believe in changing the society so girls are not raised to be though of as less of a person and know they deserve to be loved. This involves a much harder decision then throwing away people into prison, it involves valuing families and children.
Punishing the pedophile is treating the symptom not the disease. I want the whole thing abolished.